The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Receptive fields of single cells and topography in mouse visual cortex
Abstract
The visual cortex was studied in the mouse (C57 Black/6J strain) by recording from single units, and a topographic map of the visual field was constructed. Forty‐five percent of the neurons in striate cortex responded best to oriented line stimuli moving over their receptive fields; they were classified as simple (17%), complex (25%) and hypercomplex (3%). Of all preferred orientations horizontal was most common. Fifty‐five percent of receptive fields were cicularly symmetric: these were on‐center (25%), off‐center (7%) and homogeneous on‐off in type (23%). Optimal stimulus velocities were much higher than those reported in the cat, mostly varying between 20° and 300°/sec. The field of vision common to the two eyes projected to more than one‐third of the striate cortex. Although the contralateral eye provided the dominating influence on cells in this binocular area, more than two‐thirds of cells could also be driven through the ipsilateral eye. The topography of area 17 was similar to that found in other mammals: the upper visual field projected posteriorly, the most nasal part mapped onto the lateral border. Here the projection did not end at the vertical meridian passing through the animal's long axis, but proceeded for at least 10° into the ipsilateral hemifield of vision, so that at least 20° of visual field were represented in both hemispheres. The magnification in area 17 was rather uniform throughout the visual field. In an area latral to area 17 (18a) the fields were projected in condensed mirror image fashion with respect to the arrangement of area 17. Medial to area 17 a third visual area (area 18) was again related to 17 as a condensed mirror image.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex
Hubel, D. H., & Wiesel, T. N. (1962) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1962.sp006837 · Cited by 13,680
Cited by
Ferrier lecture. Functional architecture of macaque monkey visual cortex
Hubel, D. H., & Wiesel, T. N. (1977) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.1977.0085 · Cited by 2,608
Huang, Z. J., Kirkwood, A., Pizzorusso, T., Porciatti, V., Morales, B., Bear, M. F., Maffei, L., & Tonegawa, S. (1999) · Cell · doi:10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81509-3 · Cited by 1,198
The development of ocular dominance columns in normal and visually deprived monkeys
Le Vay, S., Wiesel, T. N., & Hubel, D. H. (1980) · Journal of Comparative Neurology · doi:10.1002/cne.901910102 · Cited by 1,123
Highly selective receptive fields in mouse visual cortex
Niell, C. M., & Stryker, M. P. (2008) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0623-08.2008 · Cited by 1,081
Experience-Dependent Plasticity of Binocular Responses in the Primary Visual Cortex of the Mouse
Gordon, J. A., & Stryker, M. P. (1996) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.16-10-03274.1996 · Cited by 854
Metadata
- Authors
- Dräger, U. C.
- Venue
- Journal of Comparative Neurology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1975-04
- Volume
- 160
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 269-289
- ISSN
- 0021-9967 (ISSN-L)
- 1096-9861
- OpenAlex
- W1521319725
- Cited by
- 415
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Receptive fields of single cells and topography in mouse visual cortex. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cne.901600302
- The paper
- Dräger, U. C. (1975). Receptive fields of single cells and topography in mouse visual cortex. Journal of Comparative Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.901600302
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.